... attacks the relationship between the premise and conclusion. This answer to ... flat out contradicts the "path" premise and not the substance of ...
http://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-25-section-2-question-19/
I do not understand how the answer choice C is supported at all. What part of the premise supports answer C? Thank you.
In understand that the word “for” introduces a premise with the conclusion following the premise or preceding this word. Does this this concept apply when “for example” is in the stimulus?